Executive Summary

This report presents an assessment of the 2^nd Yerevan Dialogue held on 26–27 May 2025, following SpecialEurasia’s official visit to Armenia, participation at the event, and direct engagement with local representatives.

The event showed Armenia’s strategic goal of peace with Azerbaijan through its “Crossroads of Peace” initiative, but also exposed ongoing geopolitical challenges and diplomatic difficulties.

This report evaluates the regional implications of the forum, assesses Armenia’s foreign policy trajectory, and provides insight into current regional alignments and security concerns across the South Caucasus.

Key Takeaways

1. Armenia has reiterated its commitment to a peace agreement with Azerbaijan; however, Baku’s latest demands might create an impasse.
2. The Yerevan Dialogue confirmed Armenia’s multipolar foreign policy and efforts to diversify regional partnerships.
3. The peace process remains central to Armenia’s internal stability, border security, and international positioning.

Background Information

Policymakers, foreign delegates, and regional observers convened in Yerevan for the two-day Yerevan Dialogue 2025. Addressing the forum, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan issued a forceful call for peace with Azerbaijan, referencing a completed agreement drafted in March. Armenia expressed readiness to sign, but Azerbaijan’s demand to dissolve the OSCE Minsk Group and alter the Armenian Constitution have raised concerns among the Armenian leadership and public opinion. The constitutional amendment would require a national referendum, which Yerevan has not scheduled.

Pashinyan reiterated Armenia’s acceptance of Azerbaijan’s borders, stressing that the agreement’s ratification would ease their shared constitutional concerns. The Prime Minister cited the demilitarized Tavush border as evidence of progress and touted the “Crossroads for Peace” initiative to foster regional connectivity. However, he also criticised Azerbaijan’s insistence on exclusive transit corridors, reiterating that all links must respect sovereignty and reciprocity.

In response, Azerbaijan’s Foreign Ministry charged Armenia with obstructing regional cooperation and avoiding necessary constitutional reforms by resisting Baku’s demands for a transport corridor. Azerbaijani officials maintained that references to “Western Azerbaijan” concern displaced persons’ rights rather than territorial ambitions.

Geopolitical Scenario

The Yerevan Dialogue 2025 provided a unique lens through which to evaluate the current geopolitical dynamics of Armenia and the broader South Caucasus. The forum validated Armenia’s multifaceted foreign policy approach, emphasising the intricate interaction of internal priorities, regional security challenges, and the influence of global powers.

Below are the main strategic considerations emerging from the event, supported by field observations and engagements with local actors.

• Armenia is pursuing a multipolar foreign policy to balance between competing global and regional powers. Yerevan maintains a diversified foreign policy, carefully balancing its relationships to avoid over-reliance on any one nation. This includes maintaining traditional security ties with Russia, while simultaneously deepening cooperation with the European Union, the United States, India, France, and Iran. The Yerevan Dialogue attracted a wide range of international delegates, from Western countries to regional key players such as Iran and the Gulf states, demonstrating Armenia’s role as a neutral but engaged actor in the evolving global order. This strategy serves to preserve Yerevan’s autonomy while inviting economic and security partnerships that mitigate regional isolation.
• The “Crossroads of Peace” initiative represents Armenia’s principal geopolitical instrument to foster regional integration and enhance internal resilience.
  Prime Minister Pashinyan used the Yerevan Dialogue to promote the “Crossroads for Peace” as a blueprint for infrastructure development, economic interconnectivity, and political stabilisation. This project aims to open up transport links between Armenia, Azerbaijan, Turkey, and Iran, integrating Armenia into global supply chains. This also strategically aims to transform Armenia from a vulnerable, landlocked country into a logistical and diplomatic center. However, Baku’s demand for a private corridor through Armenia, circumventing Yerevan’s authority, jeopardizes this vision by imposing unfair conditions that violate principles of sovereignty.
• A peaceful resolution with Azerbaijan is crucial for regional stability and the Pashinyan government’s survival. Facing national elections in 2026, the current Armenian government, under the leadership of Pashinyan, must demonstrably advance peace and prevent further conflict. A successful agreement with Azerbaijan could boost the government’s legitimacy and weaken nationalist opponents like Robert Kocharyan. Failing peace negotiations or renewed border clashes will damage public trust, embolden the opposition, and further destabilise Armenia’s already fragile political system. Consequently, Pashinyan’s stress on diplomacy achieves aims in both foreign policy and internal governance.
• Despite its peace rhetoric, Yerevan is actively diversifying its defence. Recognising the widening military gap with Baku, Yerevan has adopted a strategy of defence diversification. Although Russia is a crucial security partner within the CSTO, recent arms deals with France and India, plus ongoing talks with the United States, show a deliberate shift in military reliance. Dissatisfaction with Russia’s limited response motivates this shift during recent border incidents, as well as the need to modernise the armed forces considering Azerbaijan’s expanding military capabilities. Defence diversification also functions as a strategic deterrent, reinforcing Armenia’s negotiating position in the peace process.
• Iran’s support for Armenia aligns with its strategic goals. Iranian Defence Minister Aziz Nasirzadeh’s visit to Yerevan, just days before the Yerevan Dialogue, showed Tehran’s worry about regional border shifts and any effort to undermine Armenian sovereignty. Iran views the Syunik corridor and the Armenian-Iranian border as critical to its regional access and influence, particularly considering Azerbaijan’s ties with Israel and growing cooperation with Turkey. By highlighting historical ties and strong bilateral relations with Armenia, Tehran signals its intention to be a stabilising influence, upholding Armenia’s existing borders.
• Russia’s South Caucasus policy is shifting amid competition, but it remains influential. Sergey Lavrov’s recent trip to Armenia highlighted Russia’s attempt to maintain its influence in a region increasingly swayed by the West. Despite Brussels’ growing influence and Armenia’s shift in security alliances, which challenge Moscow’s traditional dominance, the Kremlin keeps a significant military presence and plays a crucial mediating role in negotiations with Baku. However, its effectiveness is being questioned locally because of its perceived inaction during Azerbaijan’s recent military gains. Russia’s future influence hinges on its capacity to adapt to Yerevan’s emerging multipolar diplomatic framework.
• Azerbaijan’s assertive stance complicates talks. While Yerevan has signalled readiness to ratify the peace agreement, Baku has introduced new demands, including the amendment of Armenia’s Constitution and the formal dissolution of the OSCE Minsk Group. Yerevan faces political and legal pressure delaying the deal. Baku’s claims about “Western Azerbaijan” and its transit demands threatened Armenia’s territorial integrity. Baku carefully balances political pressure and economic advantage to gain strategic ground without resorting to open warfare, at least for the time being.
• Armenia’s current government increasingly views the European Union and the United States as guarantors of its sovereignty and democracy. The EU observation mission and statements from visiting European officials at the Yerevan Dialogue show Western support for a rules-based solution to the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict. EU and US foreign policies, as well as their transportation strategies, depend on the success of the “Crossroads for Peace” initiative. Therefore, to maintain their political influence and local support, Brussels and Washington must prevent further military escalation between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

SpecialEurasia’s video of the speech of the Armenian Prime Minister, Nikol Pashinyan, at the Yerevan Dialogue 2025

Overall Assessment

A confluence of internal vulnerabilities, external threats, and the strategic necessity to maintain multipolar engagement shapes Armenia’s current geopolitical posture. Although Armenia supports peace, the Yerevan Dialogue highlighted its limited power and strategic vulnerability. Armenia’s diplomatic success hinges on advancing peace, navigating regional tensions, and securing domestic political backing concurrently.